Re: PEAR Forum

["Tomas V.V.Cox" <cox@idecnet.com>] > Stig Sæther Bakken wrote: > > > > PEAR has room for larger packages like Phorum (the "A" in PEAR is for > > "Application" after all), but we haven't quite figured out a way to > > integrate them yet. > > > > We need to figure out how to fit applications into the package > > namespace. I guess it cooks down to picking one of these two options: > > > > 1. Each application gets its own top-level package name. Pros: > > simple. Cons: may clash with topics we may want to add later. If > > application packages have fairly unique names it shouldn't matter. > > > > 2. Each application prepends something to its package name, for > > example "App_". Pros: won't clash with topics. Cons: it just > > looks silly. > > > > I'm in favor of (1). > > > > What about a top level "Apps" category? Any way, apps like Phorum needs > to be enterily installed under the web document root and installing it > in the pear base directory hasn't much sense (at least public files). I see a point in distinguishing ready-to-run web applications from pure library packages and eventually extensions detached from PHP. Having one top-level category for each is a pretty straightforward way to solve it. - Stig -- Stig Sæther Bakken <ssb@alltheweb.com> Fast Search & Transfer ASA, Trondheim, Norway